Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma
Satish @Satbhagwan – Appellant
Versus
State N.C.T Of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 19.03.2025 [hereafter "impugned order"], passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North-West, Rohini Courts, New Delhi [hereafter "Trial Court"] vide which the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 348 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [hereafter "BNSS"], seeking summoning of a witness namely Ms. Priyanka Sehgal, was dismissed, in case arising out of FIR No. 378/2013, Police Station Kanjhawala, North-West, Delhi.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that on 17.11.2013, pursuant to receipt of a PCR call, the police had reached the spot and found that the villagers of the area had caught hold of a man, i.e. the present petitioner Satish, who had been beaten up by the members of public. Upon enquiring, the police was informed that the petitioner had entered the house of one Deepak at night (for committing theft) and had caught hold of the prosecutrix. The medical examination of the prosecutrix was conducted at Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital, Mangolpuri. Upon a complaint being lodged by the prosecutrix, the FIR was initially registered fo
The court affirmed that the power to summon witnesses must be exercised judiciously to prevent unnecessary delays in trials, emphasizing the importance of timely evidence presentation.
The court determines that the discretionary power under Section 311 CrPC for summoning witnesses must be exercised judiciously; prior inconsistent evidence negates the necessity for re-examination.
The court reaffirmed that recall and re-examination of witnesses under Section 311 CrPC should only occur when essential for justice, particularly rejecting unnecessary processes that may lead to an ....
Summoning of witness – Conduct of petitioner in preferring successive applications under Section 311 of Code and seeking adjournments cannot be countenanced.
The court affirmed that under Section 311 Cr.P.C., witnesses can be summoned at any stage if their testimony is essential for justice, prioritizing truth and fairness in trials.
The court affirmed that the summoning of witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is crucial for ensuring a fair trial and just decision.
The accused has an unfettered right to summon witnesses essential for the defence, and the trial court's discretion to reject such requests is limited to preventing vexation or delay.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
